Sampras Greatest Ever?

[pj80]

this was pete's answer during 1997 us open

Q. Without us asking you again and again about whether you want to break, want to break Emerson's record, do you have sympathy with Tony Quinn, Hank Aaron, who were asked again and again and again if they were going to break a critical record?

PETE SAMPRAS: No, because it's something that's been asked quite a bit, but I've been giving the same answer. I mean, you know, sure it would be nice to break it, but I think we all have to understand that there are many years that Laver didn't play Grand Slams, for about six years. He could have won 15 or 20 majors. It's just a number out there. If I break it, doesn't mean I'm the best ever or whatever. It's just a number that, sure, I would love to break, and it's a goal that I definitely want to achieve. But hopefully one day I'll do it.



does that mean federer is the greates if he breaks sampras' record?

 

[drakulie]

Federer is the best player ever between the lines. If he ends up with better numbers than Pete or any of the other greats, that's just icing on the cake.

 

[Azzurri]

I just can't give Federer that label: GOAT

I look at it this way....who is your competition (in prime years) and how long were you at the top. Sampras had a great deal more competition than Federer. Fed does not have Edberg, Becker, Goran, Cash, Rafter, Agassi (prime), Brugeria, and I am sure I am missing a few more.

Fed has quality players, but they are all the same player types. They all play from the baseline. Sampras had to deal with players that had versatile games. Look at Becker...his serve and volley and his baseline game were excellent. Edberg could play on clay. Goran's serve was the best ever and he was so good he could beat anyone...on days his brain did not explode.
Agassi...his prime years (of course he skipped out a few years because of his ex).

Fed just does not have the types of players Sampras had.

 

[caulcano]

I look at it this way....who is your competition (in prime years) and how long were you at the top. Sampras had a great deal more competition than Federer. Fed does not have Edberg, Becker, Goran, Cash, Rafter, Agassi (prime), Brugeria, and I am sure I am missing a few more.

Whichever way you see it, the first 5 are S&V players, in todays game you can't S&V & expect to win, for a variety of reasons. The main reasons being people are better at returning & also the balls are slower.

As for Brugeria, Nadal would beat him more often than not.

I just can't give Federer that label: GOAT

Agree .... until he retires.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

"And They're Off!!.......sigh.....yet again........."

~The Racing Form~
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Belmont Racetrack, Belmont, NY
Track: Frozen
Race: "The Futile Stakes"

Horse/Odds

Federer (3-2)
Petey Pete (3-1)
Fed-Fan (5-2)
Topspin Monkey (6-1)
What About Laver? (7-2)
Who Cares? (10-1)
Enough Already (15-1)
No Competition (20-1)
Close The Thread (30-1)

READER ADVISORY: READ THE FOLLOWING AS FAST AS YOU CAN


".....they're all set in their chutes....'Fed-Fan' appears to be acting up already; no surprise there ....

R..R..R-I-I-N-G!!!


.......A-A-AND, they're off!......coming out of the gate, it's 'Petey Pete' along the rail, followed closely by: 'Fed-Fan' .... 'Federer' .... 'Who Cares?' ... 'Enough Already' .... 'No Competition' ... 'Close The Thread' ..... 'No Competition' ..... a neighing 'Topspin Monkey' hanging on the outside, and finally 'What About Laver?'

.....moving up to the 1/8th pole, as expected it's 'Petey Pete' right on the rail and right on his tail is 'Federer' with the always agitated 'Fed-Fan' right alongside them......


......nearing the halfway mark already we're seeing some early jockeying for position with some of the 'underdogs' not only hanging tough but actually starting to make a run for it as well....we'll see if their "jocks" got too anxious and pulled the trigger too soon ...... meanwhile, it's 'Petey Pete' and 'Federer' now running neck-and-neck with Mirka the jockey really riding 'Federer' hard; she's really giving him the whip and we're only halfway to the finish .... Mirka must REALLY want this one....BADLY!!! ......

...... as they continue, the rest of the pack has closed ranks on the leaders and it appears we're set for a wild stampede to the finish!!..... here come the underdogs in a rush for position!..... 'Topspin Monkey' swings to the outside!....they're nearing the three/quarter pole and are heading towards the back stretch ...... and.....and!...whatta you know!!!....'Petey Pete' .. 'Federer' .. and 'Fed Fan' are all fading badly ..... it's the underdogs that are running away with the show--make that the win, place and show!!!!.....'What About Laver?' 'No Competition' and 'Topspin Monkey' are all making a move....what excitement--this is insane!.....and now!!!.... suddenly!!!...... 'Topspin Monkey' has 'hit-the-dirt' and in a fit of stubborness is refusing to continue racing.....oh my God!!...as it turns out, 'Topspin Monkey' is NOT a horse but in fact, a braying donkey in drag; in my 115 years of horse racing, I never thought I'd see this!!!...... There's definitely gonna be an 'inquiry' into that one!!!!.... Meanwhile:

HERE THEY COME DOWN THE STRETCH--THE CROWD IS ROARING!!!....WHAT BEDLAM!!!!...WHAT A RACE!!!!!:

....Here they come!!!....'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' 'Close This Thread' ...... 'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' and 'Close This Thread' ...... and at the wire....in the end it's:

'Who Cares?' ..... 'Close This Thread' ..... 'ENOUGH ALREADY!'


... enough already ...

 

[stormholloway]

Well written.

I agree... who cares who the "greatest" is? Just buy their classic matches on DVD and enjoy the tennis. It's supposed to be about the tennis, not about who the best is.

 

[Rabbit]

Hmmmm....I wonder how 'Who Cares' would've done against 'Secretariat'. I mean with the advances in breeding, track maintenance, horse shoes, and veterinary medicine...'Who Cares' would have dominated 'Secretariat'.

The fact is that the Triple Crown is much less real a goal now because of the increased competition. The horses now are bigger and more athletic. The three years they spend in training from birth is more intense. The older horses were allowed to graze without any real goals in mind until they were at least two.

In Secretariat's day, they didn't have horse shoes designed for specific track compositions. Nike and Adidas are the leaders in horse shoe design today. Now this is not to say that given the shoes from Secretariat's day Who Cares wouldn't have won anyway. Who Cares is clearly a superior physical specimen when compared with Secretariat. I mean after all, that was the 70s and horses then had not evolved the clearly superior tactics of today.

 

[Budgerigar]

fed get 1 french open goatier than sampras for sure, if 2 becomes goat over laver.

 

[Azzurri]

Whichever way you see it, the first 5 are S&V players, in todays game you can't S&V & expect to win, for a variety of reasons. The main reasons being people are better at returning & also the balls are slower.

What?? You are saying a S&V player could not be successfull and even dominate? C'mon....until we have a real (not Henman) S&V with courage and brains, Roger will continue to dominate. Sampras has always said...a guy can beat Fed by attacking him. Of course you need a Becker, Gorand, Sampras like serve and volley.

 

[ksbh]

That is a masterpiece Dedans!

[size=+2]~The Racing Form~[/size]
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Belmont Racetrack, Belmont, NY
Track: Frozen
Race: "The Futile Stakes"

Horse/Odds

Petey Pete (2-1)
Federer (3-2)
Fed-Fan (5-2)
Topspin Monkey (6-1)
What About Laver? (5-1)
Who Cares? (10-1)
Enough Already (15-1)
No Competition (20-1)
Close The Thread (30-1)

READER ADVISORY: READ THE FOLLOWING AS FAST AS YOU CAN


".....they're all set in their chutes....'Fed-Fan' appears to be acting up already; no suprise there ....

[size=+1]R-I-I-N-G!!![/size]

.......A-A-AND, they're off!......coming out of the gate, it's 'Petey Pete' along the rail, followed closely by: 'Fed-Fan' .... 'Federer' .... 'Who Cares?' ... 'Enough Already' .... 'No Competition' ... 'Close The Thread' ..... 'No Competition' ..... a neighing 'Topspin Monkey' hanging on the outside, and finally 'What About Laver?'

.....moving up to the 1/8th pole, as expected it's the favorites 'Petey Pete' right on the rail, and right on his tail is 'Federer' with the always agitated 'Fed-Fan' right alongside them......


......nearing the halfway mark already we're seeing some early jockeying for position with some of the 'underdogs' not only hanging tough but actully starting to make a run for it as well....we'll see if their "jocks" got too anxious and pulled the trigger too soon ...... meanwhile, it's 'Petey Pete' and 'Federer' now running neck-and-neck with Mirka the jockey really riding 'Federer' hard; she's really giving him the whip and we're only halfway to the finish .... Mirka must REALLY want this one....BADLY!!! ......

...... as they continue, the rest of the pack has closed ranks on the leaders and it appears we're set for a wild stampede to the finish!!..... here come the underdogs in a rush for position!..... 'Topspin Monkey' swings to the outside!....they're nearing the three/quarter pole and are heading towards the back stretch ...... and.....and!...whatta you know!!!....'Petey Pete' .. 'Federer' .. and 'Fed Fan' are all fading badly ..... it's the underdogs that are running away with the show--make that the win, place and show!!!!.....'What About Laver?' 'No Competition' and 'Topspin Monkey' are all making a move....what excitement--this is insane!.....and now!!!.... suddenly!!!...... 'Topspin Monkey' has 'hit-the-dirt' and in a fit of stubborness is refusing to continue racing.....oh my God!!...as it turns out, 'Topspin Monkey' is NOT a horse but in fact, a braying donkey in drag; in my 115 years of horseracing, I never thought I'd see this!!!..... There will definitely be an 'inquiry' into that one!!!!.... Meanwhile:

HERE THEY COME DOWN THE STRETCH--THE CROWD IS ROARING!!!....WHAT BEDLAM!!!!...WHAT A RACE!!!!!:

....Here they come!!!....'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' 'Close This Thread' ...... 'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' and 'Close This Thread' ...... and at the wire....in the end it's:

[size=+1]'Who Cares?' ..... 'Close This Thread' ..... 'ENOUGH ALREADY!'[/size]


... enough already ...

 

[psamp14]

^^LOL! HILARIOUS! ...great stuff dedans penthouse!!!

 

[justineheninhoogenbandfan]

I just can't give Federer that label: GOAT

I look at it this way....who is your competition (in prime years) and how long were you at the top. Sampras had a great deal more competition than Federer. Fed does not have Edberg, Becker, Goran, Cash, Rafter, Agassi (prime), Brugeria, and I am sure I am missing a few more.

Fed has quality players, but they are all the same player types. They all play from the baseline. Sampras had to deal with players that had versatile games. Look at Becker...his serve and volley and his baseline game were excellent. Edberg could play on clay. Goran's serve was the best ever and he was so good he could beat anyone...on days his brain did not explode.
Agassi...his prime years (of course he skipped out a few years because of his ex).

Fed just does not have the types of players Sampras had.

Edberg-past his prime by that point
Becker-arguably past his prime by that piont
Goran-one great shot, no better then todays top players
Cash-no better then todays top players and not a top player by then anyway
Agassi-was only playing serious tennis a couple of those years
Rafter-no better then todays top players
Bruguera-weaker then Nadal, both on clay, and on other surfaces

 

[snapple]

Edberg-past his prime by that point - how bout from 1990-93
Becker-arguably past his prime by that piont see above
Goran-one great shot, no better then todays top players but presents a different style of play, THAT is the main point here
Cash-no better then todays top players and not a top player by then anyway see above
Rafter-no better then todays top players see above

 

[WhiteSox05CA]

Hells yeah! (Federer is gonna run it though)

 

[justineheninhoogenbandfan]

Edberg-past his prime by that point - how bout from 1990-93
Becker-arguably past his prime by that piont see above
Goran-one great shot, no better then todays top players but presents a different style of play, THAT is the main point here
Cash-no better then todays top players and not a top player by then anyway see above
Rafter-no better then todays top players see above

Sampras did not start his run at top until 1993, and Edberg was not in his prime in 1993 IMO-losing to Courier in a Wimbledon semi, and losing in so many hard court events early. Becker also was losing early in so many hard courts event in 93-95 for a great player to still be in his prime. What was different about Goran? There are lots of huge servers who can do nothing else that well, his serve was just more outstanding then most. Cash was practicaly nothing on the ATP tour by the time 1993 came around due to injuries, a middling serve-volleyer like Mirnyi is probably better then he was by that point, in fact he didnt even play a tour match in 1993 before playing around 8 events almost all early round losses in 94-95.

 

[rounick]

Alternatively,place your votes:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=116596

 

[drakulie]

Yes, Sampras Is The Greatest Baseliner Ever. Unfortunately He Was Always Sick During The French Open Which Is Why He Never Won It.

 

[prosealster]

[size=+2]~The Racing Form~[/size]
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Belmont Racetrack, Belmont, NY
Track: Frozen
Race: "The Futile Stakes"

Horse/Odds

Petey Pete (2-1)
Federer (3-2)
Fed-Fan (5-2)
Topspin Monkey (6-1)
What About Laver? (5-1)
Who Cares? (10-1)
Enough Already (15-1)
No Competition (20-1)
Close The Thread (30-1)

READER ADVISORY: READ THE FOLLOWING AS FAST AS YOU CAN


".....they're all set in their chutes....'Fed-Fan' appears to be acting up already; no suprise there ....

[size=+1]R-I-I-N-G!!![/size]

.......A-A-AND, they're off!......coming out of the gate, it's 'Petey Pete' along the rail, followed closely by: 'Fed-Fan' .... 'Federer' .... 'Who Cares?' ... 'Enough Already' .... 'No Competition' ... 'Close The Thread' ..... 'No Competition' ..... a neighing 'Topspin Monkey' hanging on the outside, and finally 'What About Laver?'

.....moving up to the 1/8th pole, as expected it's the favorites 'Petey Pete' right on the rail, and right on his tail is 'Federer' with the always agitated 'Fed-Fan' right alongside them......


......nearing the halfway mark already we're seeing some early jockeying for position with some of the 'underdogs' not only hanging tough but actully starting to make a run for it as well....we'll see if their "jocks" got too anxious and pulled the trigger too soon ...... meanwhile, it's 'Petey Pete' and 'Federer' now running neck-and-neck with Mirka the jockey really riding 'Federer' hard; she's really giving him the whip and we're only halfway to the finish .... Mirka must REALLY want this one....BADLY!!! ......

...... as they continue, the rest of the pack has closed ranks on the leaders and it appears we're set for a wild stampede to the finish!!..... here come the underdogs in a rush for position!..... 'Topspin Monkey' swings to the outside!....they're nearing the three/quarter pole and are heading towards the back stretch ...... and.....and!...whatta you know!!!....'Petey Pete' .. 'Federer' .. and 'Fed Fan' are all fading badly ..... it's the underdogs that are running away with the show--make that the win, place and show!!!!.....'What About Laver?' 'No Competition' and 'Topspin Monkey' are all making a move....what excitement--this is insane!.....and now!!!.... suddenly!!!...... 'Topspin Monkey' has 'hit-the-dirt' and in a fit of stubborness is refusing to continue racing.....oh my God!!...as it turns out, 'Topspin Monkey' is NOT a horse but in fact, a braying donkey in drag; in my 115 years of horseracing, I never thought I'd see this!!!..... There will definitely be an 'inquiry' into that one!!!!.... Meanwhile:

HERE THEY COME DOWN THE STRETCH--THE CROWD IS ROARING!!!....WHAT BEDLAM!!!!...WHAT A RACE!!!!!:

....Here they come!!!....'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' 'Close This Thread' ...... 'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' and 'Close This Thread' ...... and at the wire....in the end it's:

[size=+1]'Who Cares?' ..... 'Close This Thread' ..... 'ENOUGH ALREADY!'[/size]


... enough already ...

HAHAHAH.. that's really clever m8 :grin:

 

[ShooterMcMarco]

dedans is a genius

 

[stoneagle]

does that mean federer is the greates if he breaks sampras' record?[/QUOTE

a big NO!

how can roger be the goat, or better than sampras. roger is only breaking
numbers, but he's not really playing against a human being(pete in physical
sense or the rest of the past champs). fed could be the greatest "record
holder",but not as being the "greatest single player ever" among the rest. roger never competed againstborg,connors,emerson,vilas, becker,mcenroe,
lendl, etc..... how can you classify fed as being better than these past players ?. it's impossible to know to be the goatest of them all.

 

[lorenza]

dedans is a genius

i concur. that was hilarious!

 

[Sagittar]

[SIZE=+2]~The Racing Form~[/SIZE]
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Belmont Racetrack, Belmont, NY
Track: Frozen
Race: "The Futile Stakes"

Horse/Odds

Petey Pete (2-1)
Federer (3-2)
Fed-Fan (5-2)
Topspin Monkey (6-1)
What About Laver? (5-1)
Who Cares? (10-1)
Enough Already (15-1)
No Competition (20-1)
Close The Thread (30-1)

READER ADVISORY: READ THE FOLLOWING AS FAST AS YOU CAN


".....they're all set in their chutes....'Fed-Fan' appears to be acting up already; no suprise there ....

[SIZE=+1]R-I-I-N-G!!![/SIZE]

.......A-A-AND, they're off!......coming out of the gate, it's 'Petey Pete' along the rail, followed closely by: 'Fed-Fan' .... 'Federer' .... 'Who Cares?' ... 'Enough Already' .... 'No Competition' ... 'Close The Thread' ..... 'No Competition' ..... a neighing 'Topspin Monkey' hanging on the outside, and finally 'What About Laver?'

.....moving up to the 1/8th pole, as expected it's the favorites 'Petey Pete' right on the rail, and right on his tail is 'Federer' with the always agitated 'Fed-Fan' right alongside them......


......nearing the halfway mark already we're seeing some early jockeying for position with some of the 'underdogs' not only hanging tough but actully starting to make a run for it as well....we'll see if their "jocks" got too anxious and pulled the trigger too soon ...... meanwhile, it's 'Petey Pete' and 'Federer' now running neck-and-neck with Mirka the jockey really riding 'Federer' hard; she's really giving him the whip and we're only halfway to the finish .... Mirka must REALLY want this one....BADLY!!! ......

...... as they continue, the rest of the pack has closed ranks on the leaders and it appears we're set for a wild stampede to the finish!!..... here come the underdogs in a rush for position!..... 'Topspin Monkey' swings to the outside!....they're nearing the three/quarter pole and are heading towards the back stretch ...... and.....and!...whatta you know!!!....'Petey Pete' .. 'Federer' .. and 'Fed Fan' are all fading badly ..... it's the underdogs that are running away with the show--make that the win, place and show!!!!.....'What About Laver?' 'No Competition' and 'Topspin Monkey' are all making a move....what excitement--this is insane!.....and now!!!.... suddenly!!!...... 'Topspin Monkey' has 'hit-the-dirt' and in a fit of stubborness is refusing to continue racing.....oh my God!!...as it turns out, 'Topspin Monkey' is NOT a horse but in fact, a braying donkey in drag; in my 115 years of horseracing, I never thought I'd see this!!!..... There will definitely be an 'inquiry' into that one!!!!.... Meanwhile:

HERE THEY COME DOWN THE STRETCH--THE CROWD IS ROARING!!!....WHAT BEDLAM!!!!...WHAT A RACE!!!!!:

....Here they come!!!....'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' 'Close This Thread' ...... 'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' and 'Close This Thread' ...... and at the wire....in the end it's:

[SIZE=+1]'Who Cares?' ..... 'Close This Thread' ..... 'ENOUGH ALREADY!'[/SIZE]


... enough already ...

LMAO
Man , did you actually write that ?! lol
it's hillarious , i actually saved it

 

[Nick Irons]

[size=+2]~The Racing Form~[/size]
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Belmont Racetrack, Belmont, NY
Track: Frozen
Race: "The Futile Stakes"

Horse/Odds

Petey Pete (2-1)
Federer (3-2)
Fed-Fan (5-2)
Topspin Monkey (6-1)
What About Laver? (5-1)
Who Cares? (10-1)
Enough Already (15-1)
No Competition (20-1)
Close The Thread (30-1)

READER ADVISORY: READ THE FOLLOWING AS FAST AS YOU CAN


".....they're all set in their chutes....'Fed-Fan' appears to be acting up already; no suprise there ....

[size=+1]R-I-I-N-G!!![/size]

.......A-A-AND, they're off!......coming out of the gate, it's 'Petey Pete' along the rail, followed closely by: 'Fed-Fan' .... 'Federer' .... 'Who Cares?' ... 'Enough Already' .... 'No Competition' ... 'Close The Thread' ..... 'No Competition' ..... a neighing 'Topspin Monkey' hanging on the outside, and finally 'What About Laver?'

.....moving up to the 1/8th pole, as expected it's the favorites 'Petey Pete' right on the rail, and right on his tail is 'Federer' with the always agitated 'Fed-Fan' right alongside them......


......nearing the halfway mark already we're seeing some early jockeying for position with some of the 'underdogs' not only hanging tough but actully starting to make a run for it as well....we'll see if their "jocks" got too anxious and pulled the trigger too soon ...... meanwhile, it's 'Petey Pete' and 'Federer' now running neck-and-neck with Mirka the jockey really riding 'Federer' hard; she's really giving him the whip and we're only halfway to the finish .... Mirka must REALLY want this one....BADLY!!! ......

...... as they continue, the rest of the pack has closed ranks on the leaders and it appears we're set for a wild stampede to the finish!!..... here come the underdogs in a rush for position!..... 'Topspin Monkey' swings to the outside!....they're nearing the three/quarter pole and are heading towards the back stretch ...... and.....and!...whatta you know!!!....'Petey Pete' .. 'Federer' .. and 'Fed Fan' are all fading badly ..... it's the underdogs that are running away with the show--make that the win, place and show!!!!.....'What About Laver?' 'No Competition' and 'Topspin Monkey' are all making a move....what excitement--this is insane!.....and now!!!.... suddenly!!!...... 'Topspin Monkey' has 'hit-the-dirt' and in a fit of stubborness is refusing to continue racing.....oh my God!!...as it turns out, 'Topspin Monkey' is NOT a horse but in fact, a braying donkey in drag; in my 115 years of horseracing, I never thought I'd see this!!!..... There will definitely be an 'inquiry' into that one!!!!.... Meanwhile:

HERE THEY COME DOWN THE STRETCH--THE CROWD IS ROARING!!!....WHAT BEDLAM!!!!...WHAT A RACE!!!!!:

....Here they come!!!....'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' 'Close This Thread' ...... 'Who Cares?' 'Enough Already!' and 'Close This Thread' ...... and at the wire....in the end it's:

[size=+1]'Who Cares?' ..... 'Close This Thread' ..... 'ENOUGH ALREADY!'[/size]


... enough already ...

Brilliant !

 

[dysonlu]

Sampras was the Greatest server and Greatest slams-ex-RG winner. But Federer is a better all-around-all-court player than Sampras ever was by a landslide.

 

[lambielspins]

I like Federer alot but I dont understand saying Federer is much more the all courter. Federer is only an excellent baseliner, Sampras was an excellent baseliner and excellent net player. I still think Federer was a better baseline game then Sampras, but Sampras's baseline game is much much more then Federer's net game which there is almost none of. Saying Federer is much more of an all court player then Sampras is the same as saying Agassi was.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

I agree there, the advancements in string technology in the last 5 years, amongst other things has made the game primarily just a baseliner game. Fed is the best baseliner, but its hard to tell what his all court game is like as he rarely volleys.

I like Federer alot but I dont understand saying Federer is much more the all courter. Federer is only an excellent baseliner, Sampras was an excellent baseliner and excellent net player. I still think Federer was a better baseline game then Sampras, but Sampras's baseline game is much much more then Federer's net game which there is almost none of. Saying Federer is much more of an all court player then Sampras is the same as saying Agassi was.

 

[Azzurri]

Edberg-past his prime by that point
Becker-arguably past his prime by that piont
Goran-one great shot, no better then todays top players
Cash-no better then todays top players and not a top player by then anyway
Agassi-was only playing serious tennis a couple of those years
Rafter-no better then todays top players
Bruguera-weaker then Nadal, both on clay, and on other surfaces

Sampras played from (at least got good) starting in 1990.
OK....here we go:

Edberg- won W(90), USO (91-92). Runner-up AO(90,91, 93) 6 finals that's still pretty good

Becker- won AO (91,96). Runner-up W (90,91,95) 5 finals..that's pretty good

Goran- won W(01). Runner-up W (92, 94, 98). He's better than Roddick!! oh his ONE attribute was probably the greatest serve ever!

Cash- ok...Cash was a little old..my bad.

Rafter- won USO (97, 98). Runner-up W(00, 01). Nice player. Better than Roddick, and any other top ten player.....give me a break. He would be #1 right now if he played and Fed was somewhere else. He would be very good compared to today's ROBOTIC players. He was an attacker...not like the rest of the cannon serving goons out there.

Bruguera: Bleieve it or not, the guy could play all surfaces:
Grand Slam highlights
Australian Open 4th (1993)
French Open W (1993, 94)
Wimbledon 4th (1994)
U.S. Open 4th (1994, 97)


My point.....which you missed was the type of players Sampras faced. These guys were not the boring baseliners of today. How in the he!! can you argue that. Tennis today is BBBBOOORRRING compared to the 70's, 80's and 90's. There is a big drop off. Bottom line Sampras had more varied types of players to contend with....you seriuosly cannot argue that. That was my whole point. Fed faces too many typical baseline players. The game has little variety. Every match I watch is the same players. I really love tennis, but not today's players (except Fed).

No one knows who's better....not me and not you. My point/arguement was the type of players Fed faces today are not as good. The players I mentioned are HOF (most) players. Hoe many besides Fed are now? None.

 

[Azzurri]

Edberg-past his prime by that point - how bout from 1990-93
Becker-arguably past his prime by that piont see above
Goran-one great shot, no better then todays top players but presents a different style of play, THAT is the main point here
Cash-no better then todays top players and not a top player by then anyway see above
Rafter-no better then todays top players see above

Good points...but Becker was still good...he would beat everyone except Fed.

 

[Azzurri]

I like Federer alot but I dont understand saying Federer is much more the all courter. Federer is only an excellent baseliner, Sampras was an excellent baseliner and excellent net player. I still think Federer was a better baseline game then Sampras, but Sampras's baseline game is much much more then Federer's net game which there is almost none of. Saying Federer is much more of an all court player then Sampras is the same as saying Agassi was.

Sweet point to make!!!!!!!!!! I agree!!!!!!!!

 

[Hardball]

I just can't give Federer that label: GOAT

I look at it this way....who is your competition (in prime years) and how long were you at the top. Sampras had a great deal more competition than Federer. Fed does not have Edberg, Becker, Goran, Cash, Rafter, Agassi (prime), Brugeria, and I am sure I am missing a few more.

Fed has quality players, but they are all the same player types. They all play from the baseline. Sampras had to deal with players that had versatile games. Look at Becker...his serve and volley and his baseline game were excellent. Edberg could play on clay. Goran's serve was the best ever and he was so good he could beat anyone...on days his brain did not explode.
Agassi...his prime years (of course he skipped out a few years because of his ex).

Fed just does not have the types of players Sampras had.

Yet if you pit anyone of those players above (@their prime) against today's top players, I will take the today's players in a heart beat. *Note I was around when Sampras was at his prime....along with Agassi, Edberg, Goran, Becker....etc.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

Storm, Rabbit, ksbh, psamp14, prosealster, Shooter McMarco, lorenza, Sagittar & Nick Irons: thank you; I'm glad you enjoyed it.

p.s.: Sagittar: yes, I did write it. Rabbit: am about to board jet for Miami/Keys; will address your post--btw, "Big Red" Secretariat (yes, an animal) was an idol of mine....even better than "Who Cares?" -lol (I'll buzz you from Cheeca Lodge, amigo)

 

[FiveO]

To expand on Slappano's points regarding Sampras's opponents:

A few state the opinion that Sampras while winning the USO in '90 didn't hit his stride until '93. Well there were some damn good players who had an effect on that.

At the '91 USO Sampras was beaten by Jim Courier in the QF. Courier had won the '91 RG and reached the QF of '91 Wimbledon and the Final of the '91 USO where he lost to Edberg. Courier would finish the year #2 behind only Edberg.

From the '91 RG through Wimbledon in '93 Courier reached 7 of the 10 majors he played and at least one final of each major. In '91 and '92 he also reached the final of the ATP Championships, today's TMC. In '94 he reached the SF of both the AO and RG. In '95 the QF of the AO and SF of the USO and then in '96 the QF of the AO and RG.

How good was Sampras in '91? He beat Courier in that ATP Championship final after beating the '91 Wimbledon champion, Michael Stich (who beat #4 Courier, #1 Edberg and #2 Becker to win that title) and Agassi and losing to Becker in the RR. Sampras then beat Ivan Lendl in the SF and Courier in the final.

Stich won Wimbledon in '91, reached the SF of RG and the QF of the USO. In '92 he reached the QF of the AO and Wimbledon. In '93 the SF of the AO and QF of Wimbledon, won two Masters Shields and the ATP Singles Championships (TMC). '94 the final of the USO, '96 the final of RG and '97 the SF of Wimbledon.

Goran Ivanisevic reached his first major final before Sampras reached his second. In fact, Ivo was the player who denied Sampras his second final by beating him in the SF of Wimbledon in '92. Was he dangerous? Yes. Was he a great? No. There were always a group of players better than him. He finished with 1 slam and 3 finals at W, a SF at the USO, 3 QF's at the AO and 2 QF's at RG. Arguably a better resume than Roddick.

Stefan Edberg was the #1 player in '91. In '92 he reached the QF of the RG and SF of both the AO and Wimbledon. He beat Sampras in the final of the USO that year then in '93 he beat Sampras again in the SF of the AO before losing to Becker in that final. Edberg also reached the QF of RG and SF of Wimbledon a QF, 2 SF and a final of Masters Series events in '93. He reached the SF of the AO in '94 and won 3 events including a Masters Shield. He also reached the final, SF and QF of three other MS events and the SF of the ATP Singles Championships. In '95 he dropped off but still remained a threat gaining one title and another SF in the ATP Singles Championships. In '96 he reached the QF of two Masters Series and the USO.

Edberg definitely denied Sampras his second major in the '92 USO final and possibly his 3rd in the SF of the AO in '93 and was still reaching the final weekend at a major and Masters in '94 and winning titles into '95.

Boris Becker. 1990 to AO 1997

Becker won 25 of his 49 career singles titles and reached 17 of his career total of 28 finals. '93 to '97 he won 12 and finaled in 9.

'90 AO reached QF, Wimbledon Final, USO SF plus 5 titles.

'91 Wins AO, SF of RG, Wimbledon Final.

'92 Wins 5 titles including ATP World Championship (TMC)

'93 Wins only 2 titles but still reaches SF of Wimbledon (beaten by Sampras) and R16 of USO.

'94 Skips AO and RG but win 4 titles and finals in the ATP World Championship (TMC)

'95 Becker finals at Wimbledon (again beaten by Sampras), reaches the SF of the USO and wins two other titles includin the ATP World Championship.

'96 Becker wins the AO, meaning he reached the final weekend of the last three majors played (W>USO>AO), he nurses injuries passing on the RG and USO and then finals in the Singles Championship for the third year in a row.

This is without delving into Agassi and leaves out a bunch of guys like Krajicek, Kafelnikov, Chang, Muster, Moya, Martin, Korda, Bruguera, Pioline, Rafter, etc., slam winners and multi-slam finalists, who like others have alluded to came in all shapes, sizes and more importantly differing game styles. Power serving or Kick serving s & v's, all-courters, counter-punching defensive baseliners, topspinning baseliners and pure ball strikers.

Would all of them have a chance with Fed? No. But would they force Fed to adapt and extend himself further than playing ostensibly the same way against 99.9% of his current opponents? Absolutely. It would change the way he could play match in and match out. That in and of itself could effect Fed's remarkable win consistency and more immediately take more out of him by being forced to make those adjustments match to match and much more so than he does now.

 

[fastdunn]

I like Federer alot but I dont understand saying Federer is much more the all courter. Federer is only an excellent baseliner, Sampras was an excellent baseliner and excellent net player. I still think Federer was a better baseline game then Sampras, but Sampras's baseline game is much much more then Federer's net game which there is almost none of. Saying Federer is much more of an all court player then Sampras is the same as saying Agassi was.

That's right. But now Federer is doing good on all surfaces which gives
impression that Federer is an all courter. But everybody plays from baseline
on all surface. That is very unfortunate turn of this game....

 

[snapple]

Excellent post by Five0.

Yet if you pit anyone of those players above (@their prime) against today's top players, I will take the today's players in a heart beat. *Note I was around when Sampras was at his prime....along with Agassi, Edberg, Goran, Becker....etc.

Hardball, don't see how you can possibly defend this statement. Just exactly WHO from number 2 through 10 would you take over Edberg, Becker, Courrier or Agassi? Other than Nadal on clay, don't see any of the current names being considered a favorite over the above names (with the possible exception of Goran).

 

[Yours!05]

That is a masterpiece Dedans!

Yes, he's outdone himself.

 

[lambielspins]

To expand on Slappano's points regarding Sampras's opponents:

A few state the opinion that Sampras while winning the USO in '90 didn't hit his stride until '93. Well there were some damn good players who had an effect on that.

At the '91 USO Sampras was beaten by Jim Courier in the QF. Courier had won the '91 RG and reached the QF of '91 Wimbledon and the Final of the '91 USO where he lost to Edberg. Courier would finish the year #2 behind only Edberg.

From the '91 RG through Wimbledon in '93 Courier reached 7 of the 10 majors he played and at least one final of each major. In '91 and '92 he also reached the final of the ATP Championships, today's TMC. In '94 he reached the SF of both the AO and RG. In '95 the QF of the AO and SF of the USO and then in '96 the QF of the AO and RG.

How good was Sampras in '91? He beat Courier in that ATP Championship final after beating the '91 Wimbledon champion, Michael Stich (who beat #4 Courier, #1 Edberg and #2 Becker to win that title) and Agassi and losing to Becker in the RR. Sampras then beat Ivan Lendl in the SF and Courier in the final.

Stich won Wimbledon in '91, reached the SF of RG and the QF of the USO. In '92 he reached the QF of the AO and Wimbledon. In '93 the SF of the AO and QF of Wimbledon, won two Masters Shields and the ATP Singles Championships (TMC). '94 the final of the USO, '96 the final of RG and '97 the SF of Wimbledon.

Goran Ivanisevic reached his first major final before Sampras reached his second. In fact, Ivo was the player who denied Sampras his second final by beating him in the SF of Wimbledon in '92. Was he dangerous? Yes. Was he a great? No. There were always a group of players better than him. He finished with 1 slam and 3 finals at W, a SF at the USO, 3 QF's at the AO and 2 QF's at RG. Arguably a better resume than Roddick.

Stefan Edberg was the #1 player in '91. In '92 he reached the QF of the RG and SF of both the AO and Wimbledon. He beat Sampras in the final of the USO that year then in '93 he beat Sampras again in the SF of the AO before losing to Becker in that final. Edberg also reached the QF of RG and SF of Wimbledon a QF, 2 SF and a final of Masters Series events in '93. He reached the SF of the AO in '94 and won 3 events including a Masters Shield. He also reached the final, SF and QF of three other MS events and the SF of the ATP Singles Championships. In '95 he dropped off but still remained a threat gaining one title and another SF in the ATP Singles Championships. In '96 he reached the QF of two Masters Series and the USO.

Edberg definitely denied Sampras his second major in the '92 USO final and possibly his 3rd in the SF of the AO in '93 and was still reaching the final weekend at a major and Masters in '94 and winning titles into '95.

Boris Becker. 1990 to AO 1997

Becker won 25 of his 49 career singles titles and reached 17 of his career total of 28 finals. '93 to '97 he won 12 and finaled in 9.

'90 AO reached QF, Wimbledon Final, USO SF plus 5 titles.

'91 Wins AO, SF of RG, Wimbledon Final.

'92 Wins 5 titles including ATP World Championship (TMC)

'93 Wins only 2 titles but still reaches SF of Wimbledon (beaten by Sampras) and R16 of USO.

'94 Skips AO and RG but win 4 titles and finals in the ATP World Championship (TMC)

'95 Becker finals at Wimbledon (again beaten by Sampras), reaches the SF of the USO and wins two other titles includin the ATP World Championship.

'96 Becker wins the AO, meaning he reached the final weekend of the last three majors played (W>USO>AO), he nurses injuries passing on the RG and USO and then finals in the Singles Championship for the third year in a row.

This without delving into Agassi and leaves out a bunch of guys like Krajicek, Kafelnikov, Chang, Muster, Moya, Martin, Korda, Bruguera, Pioline, Rafter slam winners and multi-slam finalists, who like others have alluded to came in all shapes, sizes and more importantly differing game styles. Power serving and Kick serving s & v's, all-courters, counter-punching defensive baseliners, topspinning baseliners and pure ball strikers.

Would all of them have a chance with Fed? No. But would they force Fed to adapt and extend himself further than playing ostensibly the same way against 99.9% of his current opponents? Absolutely. It would change the way he could play match in and match out. That in and of itself could effect Fed's remarkable win consistency and more immediately take more out of him by being forced to make those adjustments match to match and much more so than he does now.

How can you count the period of 90-92 when evaluating the competition Sampras faced during the period he was winning at the substained rate to win 14 grand slams? He won one premature slam title in 1990, he was only briefly as high as World #3 anytime during that 3-year period. He did not really reach the top until 1993, and 1993-2000 is the period he was at or near the top consistently and winning at the substained rate that gave him 14total slams. If Federer won a premature slam in 2001 instead I would not evaluate his competitors from 2001-2003. So no I definitely dont look at 90-92 where he clearly was not at the top regularly, and was not during the period he was winning slams at a consistent rate that made him an all time great. Yes Edberg and Becker were more in their primes then but Sampras was not at the top then either.

I dont consider Ivanisevic a better career then Roddick at all. Roddick has regularly contended at the Australian, Wimbledon, and U.S Open. Ivanisevic only regularly contended at one place-Wimbledon. Roddick already has the same number of slam finals-4, his were at 2 different slams, not at only 1 slam like Ivanisevic, and he is only 24 still.

Players like Krajicek, Kafelnikov, Chang, Muster, Moya, Martin, Korda, Bruguera, Pioline, Stich are easier opponents overall then guys like Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, who Federer dominates. I laugh at anybody thinking Kafelnikov or Chang giving Federer problems, or Muster or Bruguera giving him problems outside of clay, ROTFL!

 

[lambielspins]

The players I mentioned are HOF (most) players. Hoe many besides Fed are now? None.

Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Nadal are locks for the hall of fame. Who knows how many of the up and coming players on tour now will make it to.

 

[Azzurri]

Yet if you pit anyone of those players above (@their prime) against today's top players, I will take the today's players in a heart beat. *Note I was around when Sampras was at his prime....along with Agassi, Edberg, Goran, Becker....etc.

what?? Courier would whip anyone except Fed. Anyone. Edberg....c'mon. Not one player (except Fed) has anywhere near the talent or game he had...in the early 90's (90-93).

Serously...who is better than Agassi or Edberg...please explain.

 

[Azzurri]

To expand on Slappano's points regarding Sampras's opponents:

A few state the opinion that Sampras while winning the USO in '90 didn't hit his stride until '93. Well there were some damn good players who had an effect on that.

At the '91 USO Sampras was beaten by Jim Courier in the QF. Courier had won the '91 RG and reached the QF of '91 Wimbledon and the Final of the '91 USO where he lost to Edberg. Courier would finish the year #2 behind only Edberg.

From the '91 RG through Wimbledon in '93 Courier reached 7 of the 10 majors he played and at least one final of each major. In '91 and '92 he also reached the final of the ATP Championships, today's TMC. In '94 he reached the SF of both the AO and RG. In '95 the QF of the AO and SF of the USO and then in '96 the QF of the AO and RG.

How good was Sampras in '91? He beat Courier in that ATP Championship final after beating the '91 Wimbledon champion, Michael Stich (who beat #4 Courier, #1 Edberg and #2 Becker to win that title) and Agassi and losing to Becker in the RR. Sampras then beat Ivan Lendl in the SF and Courier in the final.

Stich won Wimbledon in '91, reached the SF of RG and the QF of the USO. In '92 he reached the QF of the AO and Wimbledon. In '93 the SF of the AO and QF of Wimbledon, won two Masters Shields and the ATP Singles Championships (TMC). '94 the final of the USO, '96 the final of RG and '97 the SF of Wimbledon.

Goran Ivanisevic reached his first major final before Sampras reached his second. In fact, Ivo was the player who denied Sampras his second final by beating him in the SF of Wimbledon in '92. Was he dangerous? Yes. Was he a great? No. There were always a group of players better than him. He finished with 1 slam and 3 finals at W, a SF at the USO, 3 QF's at the AO and 2 QF's at RG. Arguably a better resume than Roddick.

Stefan Edberg was the #1 player in '91. In '92 he reached the QF of the RG and SF of both the AO and Wimbledon. He beat Sampras in the final of the USO that year then in '93 he beat Sampras again in the SF of the AO before losing to Becker in that final. Edberg also reached the QF of RG and SF of Wimbledon a QF, 2 SF and a final of Masters Series events in '93. He reached the SF of the AO in '94 and won 3 events including a Masters Shield. He also reached the final, SF and QF of three other MS events and the SF of the ATP Singles Championships. In '95 he dropped off but still remained a threat gaining one title and another SF in the ATP Singles Championships. In '96 he reached the QF of two Masters Series and the USO.

Edberg definitely denied Sampras his second major in the '92 USO final and possibly his 3rd in the SF of the AO in '93 and was still reaching the final weekend at a major and Masters in '94 and winning titles into '95.

Boris Becker. 1990 to AO 1997

Becker won 25 of his 49 career singles titles and reached 17 of his career total of 28 finals. '93 to '97 he won 12 and finaled in 9.

'90 AO reached QF, Wimbledon Final, USO SF plus 5 titles.

'91 Wins AO, SF of RG, Wimbledon Final.

'92 Wins 5 titles including ATP World Championship (TMC)

'93 Wins only 2 titles but still reaches SF of Wimbledon (beaten by Sampras) and R16 of USO.

'94 Skips AO and RG but win 4 titles and finals in the ATP World Championship (TMC)

'95 Becker finals at Wimbledon (again beaten by Sampras), reaches the SF of the USO and wins two other titles includin the ATP World Championship.

'96 Becker wins the AO, meaning he reached the final weekend of the last three majors played (W>USO>AO), he nurses injuries passing on the RG and USO and then finals in the Singles Championship for the third year in a row.

This is without delving into Agassi and leaves out a bunch of guys like Krajicek, Kafelnikov, Chang, Muster, Moya, Martin, Korda, Bruguera, Pioline, Rafter, etc., slam winners and multi-slam finalists, who like others have alluded to came in all shapes, sizes and more importantly differing game styles. Power serving or Kick serving s & v's, all-courters, counter-punching defensive baseliners, topspinning baseliners and pure ball strikers.

Would all of them have a chance with Fed? No. But would they force Fed to adapt and extend himself further than playing ostensibly the same way against 99.9% of his current opponents? Absolutely. It would change the way he could play match in and match out. That in and of itself could effect Fed's remarkable win consistency and more immediately take more out of him by being forced to make those adjustments match to match and much more so than he does now.

FiveO.... Thanks man. You said it. Your arguement is dead on. Thank you very much for adding to my initial arguement.

 

[Azzurri]

How can you count the period of 90-92 when evaluating the competition Sampras faced during the period he was winning at the substained rate to win 14 grand slams? He won one premature slam title in 1990, he was only briefly as high as World #3 anytime during that 3-year period. He did not really reach the top until 1993, and 1993-2000 is the period he was at or near the top consistently and winning at the substained rate that gave him 14total slams. If Federer won a premature slam in 2001 instead I would not evaluate his competitors from 2001-2003. So no I definitely dont look at 90-92 where he clearly was not at the top regularly, and was not during the period he was winning slams at a consistent rate that made him an all time great. Yes Edberg and Becker were more in their primes then but Sampras was not at the top then either.

I dont consider Ivanisevic a better career then Roddick at all. Roddick has regularly contended at the Australian, Wimbledon, and U.S Open. Ivanisevic only regularly contended at one place-Wimbledon. Roddick already has the same number of slam finals-4, his were at 2 different slams, not at only 1 slam like Ivanisevic, and he is only 24 still.

Players like Krajicek, Kafelnikov, Chang, Muster, Moya, Martin, Korda, Bruguera, Pioline, Stich are easier opponents overall then guys like Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, who Federer dominates. I laugh at anybody thinking Kafelnikov or Chang giving Federer problems, or Muster or Bruguera giving him problems outside of clay, ROTFL!

Lamb...no offense, but your arguement is baseless. Its an opinion. FiveO was merely stating facts from Pete's tennis era. Pete never dominated like Fed because Pete had better competition. Fed has a bunch of Agassi clones that don't have his heart and return game. FiveO showed my Pete did not go to the top until after 93. Even then, he still faced competition from some players. Fed eats Roddick for breakfast. Roddick would get killed by Goran. Roddick has no heart. He makes me sick just watching his whiny little....

Fed has the luxury of playing clones...Sampras played quite a few great players. FiveO provided statistical prove...you will need some yourself. Just saying Roddick has been in the same amount of slams is not saying much.

 

[Azzurri]

Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Nadal are locks for the hall of fame. Who knows how many of the up and coming players on tour now will make it to.

Lamb...I officially think you just started watching tennis and were born yesterday. RODDICK!!!!!!!!!!!!! a HALL OF FAMER???????????? Are you kidding me? I hope not many people read this thread. That is just plain ridiculous. Nadal?? How? He won 2 FO...so did Sergi. Safin.....SAFIN? You really never watched tennis before 2000. You just proved it. I don't argue/debate with stupidity....

 

[Azzurri]

Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Nadal are locks for the hall of fame. Who knows how many of the up and coming players on tour now will make it to.

I was talking about Edber, Becker, Agassi, Courier.....c'mon...RODDICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dysonlu]

I like Federer alot but I dont understand saying Federer is much more the all courter. Federer is only an excellent baseliner, Sampras was an excellent baseliner and excellent net player. I still think Federer was a better baseline game then Sampras, but Sampras's baseline game is much much more then Federer's net game which there is almost none of. Saying Federer is much more of an all court player then Sampras is the same as saying Agassi was.

I don't know. I didn't remember Sampras was that great a net player but that's just my opinion. (I remember Becker and Edberg as great net players.) In fact, Brad Gilbert said, during this year's AO, that some people, for some reason, believed Sampras was a dominant net player (e.g. relying on net play as a big part of his game) but reality was that Pete played the net game almost exclusively on grass -- rarely when it's on the other surfaces.

 

[Azzurri]

I don't know. I didn't remember Sampras was that great a net player but that's just my opinion. (I remember Becker and Edberg as great net players.) In fact, Brad Gilbert said, during this year's AO, that some people, for some reason, believed Sampras was a dominant net player (e.g. relying on net play as a big part of his game) but reality was that Pete played the net game almost exclusively on grass -- rarely when it's on the other surfaces.

Gilbert said that? He's a dope anyway. Nahhh...Sampras was a net player. He had the ability to stay back, but he mostly S&V'd. No doubt. I never thought as Pete as a baseliner at all. He was not like Edberg and Mac, but he was more a S&V than Becker. Pete just had a great all-around game. If you had to label him aither baseliner or S&V, I would give him 65-70% S&V to %30 baseline. This is part of the reason why never won the FO...he was not a true baseliner. His serve was not his weapon on clay like it was on other surfaces. Brad Gilbert is a bigger jerk than I thought if he said that about Sampras. Look at what people say about Sampras on this board...there are a lot of knowledgable people and most to nearly all would consider Pete a S&V over a baseliner.

 

[FiveO]

How can you count the period of 90-92 when evaluating the competition Sampras faced during the period he was winning at the substained rate to win 14 grand slams? He won one premature slam title in 1990, he was only briefly as high as World #3 anytime during that 3-year period. He did not really reach the top until 1993, and 1993-2000 is the period he was at or near the top consistently and winning at the substained rate that gave him 14total slams. If Federer won a premature slam in 2001 instead I would not evaluate his competitors from 2001-2003. So no I definitely dont look at 90-92 where he clearly was not at the top regularly, and was not during the period he was winning slams at a consistent rate that made him an all time great. Yes Edberg and Becker were more in their primes then but Sampras was not at the top then either.

I dont consider Ivanisevic a better career then Roddick at all. Roddick has regularly contended at the Australian, Wimbledon, and U.S Open. Ivanisevic only regularly contended at one place-Wimbledon. Roddick already has the same number of slam finals-4, his were at 2 different slams, not at only 1 slam like Ivanisevic, and he is only 24 still.

Players like Krajicek, Kafelnikov, Chang, Muster, Moya, Martin, Korda, Bruguera, Pioline, Stich are easier opponents overall then guys like Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, who Federer dominates. I laugh at anybody thinking Kafelnikov or Chang giving Federer problems, or Muster or Bruguera giving him problems outside of clay, ROTFL!

You must have missed the parts where:

'91 Sampras won the ATP World Championships (TMC)

'92 Lost in the SF of Wimbledon to Ivanisevic
'92 Lost in the Final of the USO to Edberg
'93 Lost in the SF of the AO to Edberg

Sampras played on the final weekend of the last two majors of '92 and first of '93 making it three in a row. If he won any of those matches, vs. guys he already was registering wins against, Sampras's era would be viewed as extending back to '92. In terms of majors his '92 was one match win away from tying his year in '96 and better than '99. The losses to Edberg at the '92 USO and '93 AO were to a 5 and then 6 time slam winner, not just some guy.

The contention that those matches came before Sampras's time kind of flies in the face of the records, in that the '92 USO final was played when the Edberg/Sampras h2h was 2-2 and prior to the '93 AO SF was played their h2h was 3-3 and ignores the fact that Edberg was the #1 player in the world at that time. His five titles he won in '92 equalled his title count in '95 and '99 and bettered his count in '98. Edberg was the player standing between Sampras and his second slam in three years absolutely and possibly his third in 10 slams played, which would have been better than Sampras's career average for slam wins.

 

[capriatifanatic]

Lamb...I officially think you just started watching tennis and were born yesterday. RODDICK!!!!!!!!!!!!! a HALL OF FAMER???????????? Are you kidding me? I hope not many people read this thread. That is just plain ridiculous. Nadal?? How? He won 2 FO...so did Sergi. Safin.....SAFIN? You really never watched tennis before 2000. You just proved it. I don't argue/debate with stupidity....

It is obvious you are either an 12 year old or an incredably stupid fool. Either way I dont know why I am wasting my time trying typing words to a fool like yourself but I will anyway out of pity.

In the last few years Sabatini, Novotna, and Yannick Noah were inducted into the Hall of Fame. So only a complete fool would not know Roddick, Nadal, and Safin are headed to the hall of fame with ease already, despite your thinking it is some crazy concept. Nadal and Bruguera each won 2 French Opens? Yes Bruguera is retired and Nadal is only 20 and already has matched his # of French Opens, that is a good comparision isnt it, Nadal has actualy been in quarterfinals of slams on hard courts, won Masters titles on hard courts, been in a Wimbledon final, all at only 20. Mr. Bruguera has never been past the 4th round of any slam outside the French. Go crawl back under your rock, there are enough trolls/incompetents on this forum as it is.

 

[ilovecarlos]

dedans is a genius

Agree...especially love the bit about Mirka..LMAO!!!! Go Dedans...later, at the cafe...you and me...ok?

 

[Azzurri]

It is obvious you are either an 12 year old or an incredably stupid fool. Either way I dont know why I am wasting my time trying typing words to a fool like yourself but I will anyway out of pity.

In the last few years Sabatini, Novotna, and Yannick Noah were inducted into the Hall of Fame. So only a complete fool would not know Roddick, Nadal, and Safin are headed to the hall of fame with ease already, despite your thinking it is some crazy concept. Nadal and Bruguera each won 2 French Opens? Yes Bruguera is retired and Nadal is only 20 and already has matched his # of French Opens, that is a good comparision isnt it, Nadal has actualy been in quarterfinals of slams on hard courts, won Masters titles on hard courts, been in a Wimbledon final, all at only 20. Mr. Bruguera has never been past the 4th round of any slam outside the French. Go crawl back under your rock, there are enough trolls/incompetents on this forum as it is.

To be clear....I was ignorant as to the standards set to gain entry into the THOF....now that I lloked into who has gained entry from my era...I think its a complete joke....I realize now the THOF is way below the standards of other sports. I guess may it had to be....

First off you mentioned women...I did not. I was talking about the men's game.

I am really glad you wasted your time...because you make yourself sound like a whiny little boy that knows crap about what a HOF inductee should be (obviously the THOF has very, very low standards). I guess they have to. Its just such a joke that Andy Roddick...the complete bum he is will probably be in the HOF. What a joke...I am laughing now hahahahah.

I never said Sergi was a HOF'er...when did I say that? you need to get a hold of yourself. I mentioned Becker, Edberg, Agassi,...but not Bruguera. I ws stating that both players are a lot alike. Nadal may have already hit his peak...maybe.

Honestly...I don't follow the Tennis HOF...now looking into it a bit more...it is a JOKE. I assumed the HOF was like other sports (baseball, NFL and Hockey).....boy was I wrong. Thanks for opening my eyes....now I realize what a joke the tennis HOF is. So....anyone using the HOF tag on a present player is a joke. The standards set is a joke. In turn, you are a joke.

 

[capriatifanatic]

To be clear....I was ignorant

Actually the first four words say enough. Thank you.

 

[Azzurri]

Actually the first four words say enough. Thank you.

"to be clear I"????

Roddick still sucks